Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

End-to-End Retrieval with Learned Dense and Sparse Representations Using Lucene

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.18503 v1 pith:GLFFYTJY submitted 2023-11-30 cs.IR

classification cs.IR
keywords retrievalrepresentationsdensesparsedesignend-to-endframeworkindexes
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

The bi-encoder architecture provides a framework for understanding machine-learned retrieval models based on dense and sparse vector representations. Although these representations capture parametric realizations of the same underlying conceptual framework, their respective implementations of top-$k$ similarity search require the coordination of different software components (e.g., inverted indexes, HNSW indexes, and toolkits for neural inference), often knitted together in complex architectures. In this work, we ask the following question: What's the simplest design, in terms of requiring the fewest changes to existing infrastructure, that can support end-to-end retrieval with modern dense and sparse representations? The answer appears to be that Lucene is sufficient, as we demonstrate in Anserini, a toolkit for reproducible information retrieval research. That is, effective retrieval with modern single-vector neural models can be efficiently performed directly in Java on the CPU. We examine the implications of this design for information retrieval researchers pushing the state of the art as well as for software engineers building production search systems.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Artificial Intelligence and Misinformation in Art: Can Vision Language Models Judge the Hand or the Machine Behind the Canvas?

    cs.CY 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    The manuscript is internally inconsistent: the abstract claims VLM art-attribution experiments, while the full text is an unrelated hybrid-search benchmark paper.

Pith tools